| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Joost Roeleveld <joost@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:33:01 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer <grimlog@×××.de> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > If gentoo follows fedora on this mandatory initramfs trail, I'll switch |
| 6 |
>> > to FreeBSD completely. My software works on way more systems than just |
| 7 |
>> > "Linux". |
| 8 |
>> That's of course your prerogative. And, as I said before: "Linux |
| 9 |
>> strives to be much more than Unix, and that means do things |
| 10 |
>> differently." If you want to do things the same way that it was done |
| 11 |
>> in the last 20 years, maybe Linux is not the best of choices. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I read it before, but to be much more then Unix, Linux should be doing things |
| 14 |
> better. Being different is what led to MS Windows' |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
But that's the thing: we (you and me) don't see the situation the same |
| 17 |
way. To me, the proposed changes are for the better. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
>> I myself think the new technologies are worth to change the way we did |
| 20 |
>> things before. But that's just me. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> The new technologies have great merit. But, the implementation of it isn't |
| 23 |
> thought through. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
In my humble opinion, what you just said is a little pedantic. You can |
| 26 |
disagree with the proposed changes, you can argue why you think |
| 27 |
another approach could be better. But just saying "the implementation |
| 28 |
of it isn't thought through", is a little insulting to the devs. I |
| 29 |
think they though about the implementation a lot. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
>> >> And maybe I shouldn't even mention it, but I don't use OpenRC. I use |
| 32 |
>> >> systemd. And it works great on Gentoo. |
| 33 |
>> > |
| 34 |
>> > Well. Linux only. If I wanted a monoculture, I would use MS-Windows or |
| 35 |
>> > OSX. |
| 36 |
>> Relax man. I mention what I use: I'm not forcing you (or anybody else) |
| 37 |
>> to use it. But I repeat (because I said it before) that I care about |
| 38 |
>> Linux, and Linux only. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> If you care about Linux, why do you allow it to be broken in such a |
| 41 |
> fundamental way? |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Again, to me is not "breaking it". To me is "improving it". |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Regards. |
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 48 |
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación |
| 49 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives